Jump to content
Raven

The Hobbit

Recommended Posts

Thanks Raven :) I'd better spoilerize the rest :D

 

 

Having just read the book I struggled to find much in the trailer that I recognised (barrels and spiders .. and Smaug :D). I suppose that's to be expected seeing as how he's going to make forty three films out of the book :D. I guess he'll just give us glimpses of Smaug again because he shouldn't really turn up until nearer the end surely.

Who on earth is the kick-ass elf woman? and what's Legolas got to do with it? Also in places it looks very digital .. unconvincingly so .. perhaps it's not quite ready yet.

I'll still go and see it .. but there's nothing wrong with the original story and I don't know why PJ thinks it needs so many add-ons (well .. I can think of one reason :blush2:  :D) I do hope they haven't cut Beorn out .. perhaps he was there but I missed him

the addition of Tauriel & Legolas were well thougth out as it gave us some extra female in the Tolkien saga, and she gives the young females great pleasure as I saw in cinema today and my daughters found her just the best thing besides Smaug. The new movie is well worth your while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as was I. 

 

 

 

All the scenes with Tauriel and Kili were just painful. There was way too much CGI and no heart. The beginning was very rushed and Beorn was very under-used though I liked the Mayor of Laketown, his assisstant or whatever he was, appeared to be straight out of a pantomime. I mean actually tripping up Bard when he was running away from guards who were chasing him for no reason...  :banghead:

 

 

I agree with everything you've said Tim .. it's such a shame and a wasted opportunity :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the addition of Tauriel & Legolas were well thougth out as it gave us some extra female in the Tolkien saga, and she gives the young females great pleasure as I saw in cinema today and my daughters found her just the best thing besides Smaug. The new movie is well worth your while.

Sadly I didn't like many, if any, of the new additions (particularly Tauriel and Legolas) .. but it's all horses for courses. I'm glad your daughters enjoyed it :smile: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly I didn't like many, if any, of the new additions (particularly Tauriel and Legolas)

 

I've been thinking, I wouldn't have minded Legolas and Tauriel if...

 

 

 

They had just been left after the barrel scene and not followed them to Laketown. I could even forgive the little thing between Tauriel and Kili if it had only been what we saw in the prison.  But the fight in Laketown is just ridiculous, Kili getting poisoned by a random orc makes no sense as why on earth would it be carrying a Morgol arrow head! :banghead:

 

The Dwarves fighting Smaug by lighting the furnaces and pouring molten gold over him!!! :doh::banghead:

 

 

 

And yeah yeah, I know it's supposed to just be fun and it's a kids book etc etc. But then they should just stick to the book! or at least have some continuity between these films and LOTR.

 

 

 

 

If the Necromancer (aka Sauron) is as powerful as we see him in The Desolation of Smaug how can he not feel the presence of the Ring, especially when it is being used in the same forest as he is in? Also Gandalf now knows Sauron has returned and has a lot of strength but he then does nothing about it for sixty years! even though he clearly suspects that Bilbo has the Ring.

 

 

 

 

I could go listing the flaws as they are plentiful.

 

I suppose as long as children enjoy it that is the main thing, I just feel sorry them as I was only 11 when I first saw LOTR and it blew me away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, as far as I can see, if children are its target audience, then turning into three x 3-hour films and filling it with violence is denying it to the very people it's meant for :shrug:

 

Somebody needs to give Peter Jackson a slap.  He's probably the only person in the world who doesn't realise that, at most, two 2-hour movies would have been far, far better :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I finally saw it tonight, on the last showing on the last night in my local.

 

And I liked it!

 

I've heard a few grumbles over the last few months that the film is too long and includes too much unoriginal material, but that didn't really bother me.

 

To a point, I do agree with the latter; having Legolas in it and the on-going battle with the Orcs is all a bit superfluous and I would have preferred more Gandalf vs. the Necromancer time, but I have no problems with the extended scenes with Smaug because in the book the character barely has any page time at all.

 

It's not perfect, but I didn't find myself clock watching at any point and I'm now looking forward to seeing it again on Blu-ray (when I can watch it back-to-back* with the first film).

 

Good stuff!

 

*Probably over a couple of nights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to some of the comments above, that I have now read:

 

- Bard wasn't running away for no reason, it was clearly established that he was at odds with the mayor of Laketown (or whoever Stephen Fry's character is) and that was why the latter wanted him locked up.

- Tauriel adds a strong female character to the film, in a story that is otherwise lacking in female characters of any kind.  I'm not sure her inclusion was entirely necessary, but she is far from being the weakest point in the film.

- Was Kili poisoned by a Morgol arrow?  If so, what is the problem with that, given that the Orcs in question are servants of Sauron?

- I can't see where these films are breaking continuity with LotR - if anything, they are going too far into including continuity that Tolkien didn't include himself.

- I don't think Gandalf has a clue what Bilbo has found, I think he only suspects that he is hiding something from him.  He's not seen the ring or Bilbo disappear, so why would he suspect he is carrying around one of the most significant pieces of jewellery to cross the face of Middle Earth? (after all, he doesn't work out what the ring is in the books until things kick off in Fellowship . . .).

- I don't believe that this is a story that could have been told well in four hours (six, possibly, but there is still a lot more to come).

 

I think it is easy to pick holes; there is a lot here that isn't in the novel and I can see why some don't like some aspects of it, but to return to a point I made in my last post - if Jackson had done a straight translation of the book to film Smaug would have been crap, because - let's face it - he is in the book.  As things play out in the film, he's almost indestructible (although it has been all too clearly sign-posted how he is going to be defeated).

 

On the plus side, Freeman was great - as were the Dwarves - and the film looked spectacular.

 

I'm looking forward to part three, which I will see on the opening day this time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looks like more of the same to me (which if it is, I don't have a problem with it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved both Hobbit movies and thought that Jackson did a great job of adding the extra stuff that was in the index and left out of the LOTR movies. I thought that he had done this while not losing the hart or the story of the Hobbit. I also don't mind the love story with Kili and whatsherface...it helps fill the characters out well as the original character's in the book were rather flat. If you actually think about how simple and well flat the original story was you start to realise just how good a job Jackson has done with finding extra material to add to the story so that it is in fact watchable...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and the movies are so not aimed at children....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Looks awful! :banghead:

 

 

Yep.  But I'll probably go and see it anyway :lol:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Yep.  But I'll probably go and see it anyway :lol:

 

 

 

Me too. I won't be able to help myself no matter how dire the reviews will be. I simply cannot go missing any installment in a film saga I have begun watching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×